-
Targeted Oncology Jan 2024PARP inhibitors (PARPis) are effective treatment options for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) as single agents or in combination... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
PARP inhibitors (PARPis) are effective treatment options for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) as single agents or in combination with androgen receptor-targeted agents (ARTA). However, a clinically relevant adverse effect of these agents is hematological toxicity, a typical class adverse event (AE), which can lead to treatment modifications and discontinuations.
OBJECTIVE
We aimed to analyze the risk of hematological AEs, including anemia, neutropenia, and thrombocytopenia secondary to PARPi treatments in mCRPC.
PATIENTS AND METHODS
This systematic review and meta-analysis followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement. We systematically searched the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases, the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), and the European Society of Medical Oncology (ESMO) meeting abstracts for clinical trials concerning the use of PARPis, both as single agents and in combination, in patients with mCRPC. The search deadline was 30 June, 2023. We analyzed the pooled incidence of all grades of and ≥ G3 anemia, neutropenia, and thrombocytopenia. We subsequently calculated risk ratios (RRs) for all grades of and ≥ G3 AEs of PARPis versus non-PARPis from randomized clinical trials (RCTs).
RESULTS
Eleven phase 2/3 trials with olaparib, niraparib, rucaparib, and talazoparib administered as single agents or combined with ARTA were selected. Anemia was the most common all grades (38.6%) and ≥ G3 AE (24.9%). In the analysis of relative risk, six RCTs were included. The administration of PARPis significantly increased the risk of developing all grades of anemia (RR = 2.44), neutropenia (RR = 3.15), and thrombocytopenia (RR = 4.66) compared with non-PARPis. Similarly, a significant increase in the risk of ≥ G3 anemia (RR = 5.73) and thrombocytopenia (RR = 5.44), and a not significant increased risk of neutropenia (RR = 3.41), were detected.
CONCLUSIONS
In mCRPC, PARPis increase the risk of hematological toxicity compared with other treatments, both as single agents or combined with ARTA (high-quality evidence). Clinicians should be aware of this risk and the correct management, especially with the expected increased PARPis use in mCRPC.
Topics: Male; Humans; Poly(ADP-ribose) Polymerase Inhibitors; Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant; Anemia; Mutation; Neutropenia; Thrombocytopenia
PubMed: 37993604
DOI: 10.1007/s11523-023-01016-x -
European Journal of Cancer (Oxford,... May 2021Poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase-inhibitors (PARPis) showed antitumour activity in BRCA1/2-mutated cancers, with more heterogeneous outcomes in tumours harbouring... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase-inhibitors (PARPis) showed antitumour activity in BRCA1/2-mutated cancers, with more heterogeneous outcomes in tumours harbouring mutations that impair other genes involved in the DNA homologous recombination repair (HRR) or wild-type (wt).
METHODS
We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to better assess the role of PARPis in the treatment of metastatic solid tumours, with and without BRCA1/2 mutations. The primary end-point was progression-free survival (PFS). The secondary end-points were overall response rate (ORR) and overall survival (OS). A random-effects model was applied.
RESULTS
Twenty-nine studies (8,839 patients) were included. PFS was significantly improved (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.59, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.51-0.68, p < 0.001), without being affected by BRCA mutational status (p = 0.65). Significant subgroup differences were observed with regard to the tumour site (p = 0.001), line of therapy (p = 0.002), control arm (p < 0.001), type of PARPi (p < 0.001) and trials' phase (p = 0.006). PARPis were associated with ORR (relative risk: 1.35, 95% CI: 1.16-1.56, p < 0.001), with significant subgroup differences observed with regard to treatment line (p = 0.03), control arm (p = 0.04) and PARPis (p < 0.001) and independent of mutational status (p = 0.44), tumour site (p = 0.86) and trials' phase (p = 0.09). OS was significantly improved by PARPis (HR: 0.86, 95% CI: 0.80-0.92, p < 0.001), regardless of mutational status (p = 0.57), tumour site (p = 0.82), treatment line (p = 0.22), control arm (p = 0.21), PARPis (p = 0.30) and trials' phase (p = 0.26). Finally, an exploratory subgroup analysis showed a significant PFS improvement (HR: 0.51, 95% CI: 0.43-0.60, p < 0.001) with PARPis in BRCA-wt/HRR-deficient tumours.
CONCLUSION
Our results confirm the efficacy of already approved PARPi-based treatments in BRCA1/2-mutant solid tumours, support their role also in BRCA-independent HRR-deficient tumours and suggest a potentially broader efficacy in some wt tumours, perhaps with appropriate therapeutic partners. Prospective studies are warranted.
Topics: BRCA1 Protein; BRCA2 Protein; Humans; Mutation; Neoplasms; Poly(ADP-ribose) Polymerase Inhibitors; Progression-Free Survival; Recombinational DNA Repair; Risk Factors; Time Factors
PubMed: 33862496
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2021.02.035 -
International Journal of Gynecological... Oct 2020We aimed to evaluate poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor (PARPi) regimens in BRCA-mutated ovarian cancer for patients responsive to front-line platinum...
INTRODUCTION
We aimed to evaluate poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor (PARPi) regimens in BRCA-mutated ovarian cancer for patients responsive to front-line platinum (bevacizumab and olaparib, veliparib and chemotherapy, olaparib) or platinum-sensitive relapsed (olaparib, rucaprib, niraparib) patients in phase III randomized controlled trials.
METHODS
A network meta-analysis was utilized to generate the direct and indirect comparisons. The primary outcomes for network meta-analysis were efficacy (hazard ratios for progression-free survival in BRCA mutation cohort) and toxicity (odds ratios for all grade 3-4 adverse events). The American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) value framework was used to assess the cost-effectiveness of the PARPi regimens.
RESULTS
Network meta-analysis indicated no statistically significant differences in efficacy and toxicity among the assessed upfront or relapsed PARPi regimens (95% CI included 1). The ASCO value framework indicated that current PARPi regimens were similar in clinical benefits, toxicity, and net health benefit in the upfront (bevacizumab and olaparib, veliparib and chemotherapy, olaparib) and relapsed setting (olaparib, rucaprib, niraparib). The addition of bevacizumab to olaparib ($353.72) increased the cost per unit net health benefit for patients compared with olaparib monotherapy ($260.57). The upfront PARPi regimens had lower toxic scores than the regimens used at relapse.
CONCLUSIONS
The choice of PARPi regimens both in the upfront and relapsed setting should consider not only efficacy and toxicity but also costs in BRCA mutation patients. Current combining PARPi regimens are not recommended for such patients in the upfront setting from the cost-effective perspective. Upfront PARPi regimens are less toxic than those used at relapse.
Topics: Carcinoma, Ovarian Epithelial; Clinical Trials, Phase III as Topic; Female; Humans; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Network Meta-Analysis; Ovarian Neoplasms; Poly(ADP-ribose) Polymerase Inhibitors; Progression-Free Survival; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 32817083
DOI: 10.1136/ijgc-2020-001373 -
BMC Cancer Jun 2024Poly (ADP- ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPi) has been increasingly adopted for metastatic castration-resistance prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients with homologous... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Poly (ADP- ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPi) has been increasingly adopted for metastatic castration-resistance prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients with homologous recombination repair deficiency (HRD). However, it is unclear which PARPi is optimal in mCRPC patients with HRD in 2nd -line setting.
METHOD
We conducted a systematic review of trials regarding PARPi- based therapies on mCRPC in 2nd -line setting and performed a Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA). Radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) was assessed as primary outcome. PSA response and adverse events (AEs) were evaluated as secondary outcomes. Subgroup analyses were performed according to specific genetic mutation.
RESULTS
Four RCTs comprised of 1024 patients (763 harbored homologous recombination repair (HRR) mutations) were identified for quantitative analysis. Regarding rPFS, olaparib monotherapy, rucaparib and cediranib plus olaparib showed significant improvement compared with ARAT. Olaparib plus cediranib had the highest surface under cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) scores (87.5%) for rPFS, followed by rucaparib, olaparib and olaparib plus abiraterone acetate prednisone. For patients with BRCA 1/2 mutations, olaparib associated with the highest probability (98.1%) of improved rPFS. For patients with BRCA-2 mutations, olaparib and olaparib plus cediranib had similar efficacy. However, neither olaparib nor rucaparib showed significant superior effectiveness to androgen receptor-axis-targeted therapy (ARAT) in patients with ATM mutations. For safety, olaparib showed significantly lower ≥ 3 AE rate compared with cediranib plus olaparib (RR: 0.72, 95% CI: 0.51, 0.97), while olaparib plus cediranib was associated with the highest risk of all-grade AE.
CONCLUSION
PARPi-based therapy showed considerable efficacy for mCRPC patients with HRD in 2nd -line setting. However, patients should be treated accordingly based on their genetic background as well as the efficacy and safety of the selected regimen.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
CRD42023454079.
Topics: Humans; Poly(ADP-ribose) Polymerase Inhibitors; Bayes Theorem; Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant; Mutation; Male; Phthalazines; Network Meta-Analysis; Piperazines; BRCA2 Protein; Recombinational DNA Repair; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Progression-Free Survival; Indoles; BRCA1 Protein; Treatment Outcome; Quinazolines
PubMed: 38851712
DOI: 10.1186/s12885-024-12388-2 -
PloS One 2022Poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor (PARPi) have become a mainstay for the treatment of BRCA-mutant malignancies. PARPis are likely to be more effective but also...
OBJECTIVES
Poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor (PARPi) have become a mainstay for the treatment of BRCA-mutant malignancies. PARPis are likely to be more effective but also bring an increase in costs. Thus, we aimed at evaluating the cost effectiveness of PARPis in the treatment of malignancies.
METHODS
Studies of cost effectiveness of PARPis were searched from PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library. Key information was extracted from the identified studies and reviewed. Quality of the included studies was evaluated using Quality of Health Economic Studies (QHES) instrument. Modeling techniques, measurement of parameters and uncertainty analysis were analyzed across studies. Interventions and cost-effectiveness results were reported stratified by patient population.
RESULTS
Among the 25 studies identified, we included 17 on ovarian cancer, 2 on breast cancer, 3 on pancreatic cancer, and 3 on prostate cancer that involved olaparib, niraparib, rucaparib, and talazoparib. All studies had a QHES score of above 75. In the maintenance therapy of ovarian cancer, additional administration of olaparib was cost-effective for newly diagnosed patients after first-line platinum-based chemotherapy but was not cost-effective for platinum-sensitive recurrent patients in majority studies. However, the economic value of other PARPis in ovarian cancer as well as all PARPis in other tumors remained controversial. Cost-effectiveness of PARPi was primarily impacted by the costs of PARPi, survival time, health utility and discount rate. Moreover, genetic testing improved the cost-effectiveness of PARPi treatment.
CONCLUSIONS
PARPi is potentially cost-effective for patients with ovarian, pancreatic, or prostate cancer. Genetic testing can improve the cost-effectiveness of PARPi.
Topics: Female; Humans; Male; Poly(ADP-ribose) Polymerase Inhibitors; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Ovarian Neoplasms; Antineoplastic Agents; Prostatic Neoplasms
PubMed: 36520958
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0279286 -
Cancer Metastasis Reviews Sep 2016The optimal second- and third-line chemotherapy and targeted therapy for patients with advanced esophagogastric cancer is still a matter of debate. Therefore, a... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
The optimal second- and third-line chemotherapy and targeted therapy for patients with advanced esophagogastric cancer is still a matter of debate. Therefore, a literature search was carried out in Medline, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and oncology conferences until January 2016 for randomized controlled trials that compared second- or third-line therapy. We included 28 studies with 4810 patients. Second-line, single-agent taxane/irinotecan showed increased survival compared to best supportive care (BSC) (hazard ratio 0.65, 95 % confidence interval 0.53-0.79). Median survival gain ranged from 1.4 to 2.7 months among individual studies. Taxane- and irinotecan-based regimens showed equal survival benefit. Doublet chemotherapy taxane/irinotecan plus platinum and fluoropyrimidine was not different in survival, but showed increased toxicity vs. taxane/irinotecan monotherapy. Compared to BSC, second-line ramucirumab and second- or third-line everolimus and regorafenib showed limited median survival gain ranging from 1.1 to 1.4 months, and progression-free survival gain, ranging from 0.3 to 1.6 months. Third- or later-line apatinib showed increased survival benefit over BSC (HR 0.50, 0.32-0.79). Median survival gain ranged from 1.8 to 2.3 months. Compared to taxane-alone, survival was superior for second-line ramucirumab plus taxane (HR 0.81, 0.68-0.96), and olaparib plus taxane (HR 0.56, 0.35-0.87), with median survival gains of 2.2 and 4.8 months respectively. Targeted agents, either in monotherapy or combined with chemotherapy showed increased toxicity compared to BSC and chemotherapy-alone. This review indicates that, given the survival benefit in a phase III study setting, ramucirumab plus taxane is the preferred second-line treatment. Taxane or irinotecan monotherapy are alternatives, although the absolute survival benefit was limited. In third-line setting, apatinib monotherapy is preferred.
Topics: Antineoplastic Agents; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Combined Modality Therapy; Esophageal Neoplasms; Humans; Molecular Targeted Therapy; Neoplasm Staging; Proportional Hazards Models; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Retreatment; Stomach Neoplasms; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 27417221
DOI: 10.1007/s10555-016-9632-2 -
Cancer Control : Journal of the Moffitt... 2022Evidence shows that gene mutation is a significant proportion of genetic factors associated with prostate cancer. The DNA damage response (DDR) is a signal cascade...
OBJECTIVE
Evidence shows that gene mutation is a significant proportion of genetic factors associated with prostate cancer. The DNA damage response (DDR) is a signal cascade network that aims to maintain genomic integrity in cells. This comprehensive study was performed to determine the link between different DNA damage response gene mutations and prostate cancer.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A systematic literature search was performed using PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase. Papers published up to February 1, 2022 were retrieved. The DDR gene mutations associated with prostate cancer were identified by referring to relevant research and review articles. Data of prostate cancer patients from multiple PCa cohorts were obtained from cBioPortal. The OR or HR and 95% CIs were calculated using both fixed-effects models (FEMs) and random-effects models (REMs).
RESULTS
Seventy-four studies were included in this research, and the frequency of 13 DDR genes was examined. Through the analysis of 33 articles that focused on the risk estimates of DDR genes between normal people and PCa patients, DDR genes were found to be more common in prostate cancer patients (OR = 3.6293 95% CI [2.4992; 5.2705]). Also, patients in the mutated group had a worse OS and DFS outcome than those in the unmutated group ( < .05). Of the 13 DDR genes, the frequency of 9 DDR genes in prostate cancer was less than 1%, and despite differences in race, was the potential gene with the highest frequency (REM Frequency = .0400, 95% CI .0324 - .0541). The findings suggest that mutations in genes such as and in PCa patients may increase the sensitivity of Olaparib, a PARP inhibitor.
CONCLUSION
These results demonstrate that mutation in any DDR pathway results in a poor prognosis for PCa patients. Furthermore, mutations in and or the expression of and other genes significantly influence Olaparib sensitivity, which may be underlying therapeutic targets in the future.
Topics: Humans; Male; DNA Damage; DNA Repair; Mutation; Poly(ADP-ribose) Polymerase Inhibitors; Prognosis; Prostatic Neoplasms
PubMed: 36283420
DOI: 10.1177/10732748221129451 -
Expert Review of Anticancer Therapy Jul 2024This study aimed to estimate the toxicities of PARP inhibitors (PARPis), based on randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS)... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
INTRODUCTION
This study aimed to estimate the toxicities of PARP inhibitors (PARPis), based on randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database.
METHODS
Four electronic databases were searched from inception to 16 April 2024, for RCTs of approved PARPis. The primary and secondary outcomes were grade 3-5 adverse events (AEs) and grade 3-5 hematological AE, respectively. We conducted network meta-analyses to calculate the relative risks (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of outcomes. A disproportionality analysis was conducted to estimate the signals of hematological AEs associated with PARPis from the FAERS database.
RESULTS
Overall, 27 RCTs involving 11,067 patients with cancer were included. Olaparib had the best safety profile for any grade 3-5 AEs and hematological AEs among four approved PARPis. Olaparib did not increase the risk of thrombocytopenia (RR: 1.48; 95%CI: 0.64-3.39), but other PARPis did. Furthermore 14,780 hematological AE reports associated with PARPis were identified in the FAERS database, and all PARPis were associated with strong hematological AE signals. Hematological AEs mainly occurred within the first 3 months (80.84%) after PARPi initiation.
CONCLUSION
Olaparib had the best safety profile among five PARPis. PARPi-associated hematological AEs mainly occurred within the first 3 months.
REGISTRATION
PROSPERO (CRD42022385274).
Topics: Humans; Poly(ADP-ribose) Polymerase Inhibitors; Neoplasms; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Pharmacovigilance; Hematologic Diseases; Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting Systems; Antineoplastic Agents; Databases, Factual; Phthalazines; Piperazines
PubMed: 38761169
DOI: 10.1080/14737140.2024.2357822 -
Frontiers in Oncology 2020This meta-analysis investigated the comparative efficacy and safety of PARP inhibitor monotherapy as maintenance treatment in platinum sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer...
This meta-analysis investigated the comparative efficacy and safety of PARP inhibitor monotherapy as maintenance treatment in platinum sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer (ROC). Electronic databases were systematically searched for relevant RCTs. The primary endpoint was PFS. The results were stratified based on three categories: BRCA mutated patients, HRD patients, and overall population. The secondary outcome were discontinuations due to adverse events and grade 3 or 4 adverse events in maintenance phase. Five eligible RCTs were included in the network meta-analysis. For patients with BRCA mutated ovarian cancer, olaparib-throughout (HR = 0.21 with 95% CrI: 0.081-0.55), rucaparib (HR = 0.23 with 95% CrI: 0.16-0.34), olaparib (HR = 0.27 with 95% CrI: 0.20-0.35), and niraparib (HR = 0.26 with 95% CrI: 0.17-0.41) were all highly effective in comparison with placebo at improving PFS. For HRD patients, both rucaparib (HR = 0.32 with 95% CrI: 0.24-0.42) and niraparib (HR = 0.38 with 95% CrI: 0.24-0.60) were all highly effective in comparison with placebo at improving PFS. For the overall population, olaparib-throughout (HR = 0.51 with 95% CrI: 0.34-0.76), rucaparib (HR = 0.37 with 95% CrI: 0.30-0.45), olaparib (HR = 0.35 with 95% CrI: 0.25-0.49), and niraparib (HR = 0.38 with 95% CrI: 0.30-0.48) were all highly effective in comparison with placebo at improving PFS. Regarding grade 3 or 4 adverse events, the incidence of grade 3 or 4 toxicity reactions to rucaparib and niraparib were significantly higher than in the olaparib group. In terms of discontinuations due to adverse events, the treatment discontinuations were not significantly different between the three drugs. In summary, all the included maintenance treatment regimens are effective regardless of BRCA mutational status, and no statistically significant differences between rucaparib, niraparib and Olaparib in terms of PFS. In terms of safety profile, the three drugs present manageable adverse events. Clinicians should consider potential adverse events related to each of these interventions in clinical practice, and the adverse events are generally manageable.
PubMed: 33692936
DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2020.573801 -
Critical Reviews in Oncology/hematology Jun 2021To systematically review the effectiveness and harm of consolidation or maintenance therapy in patients with newly diagnosed stage II-IV EOC. (Review)
Review
Consolidation or maintenance systemic therapy for newly diagnosed stage II, III, or IV epithelial ovary, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal carcinoma: A systematic review.
BACKGROUNDS
To systematically review the effectiveness and harm of consolidation or maintenance therapy in patients with newly diagnosed stage II-IV EOC.
METHODS
MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, Cochrane Library, and PROSPERO databases, and four relevant conferences were systematically searched. We adhered to PRISMA guidelines, and used the GRADE approach to aggregate data.
RESULTS
Among 12,675 citations, 28 comprising 16,310 patients were analyzed. The certainty of aggregated study evidence ranged from high to low.
CONCLUSIONS
The existing evidence does not find overall survival benefit for consolidation therapy with chemotherapy. For maintenance therapy, comparing with placebo, olaparib, niraparib, veliparib, and bevacizumab are effective as maintenance therapy for certain patients with newly diagnosed stage III-IV epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal carcinoma respectively without reducing quality of life. Longer follow-up with more mature results of overall survival will better define the effect of these agents.
Topics: Carcinoma; Fallopian Tube Neoplasms; Fallopian Tubes; Female; Humans; Ovarian Neoplasms; Quality of Life
PubMed: 33865996
DOI: 10.1016/j.critrevonc.2021.103336